Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Astronaut

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

I rewrote this for the Science portal a while back. At VFG I got some positive and negative feedback, so I would like an in-depth review telling me what could/needs to be improved. Thank you! StaircaseCUNt 16:02, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Humour:

8

You know what you are doing and you stick to your theme throughout. Especially interesting is that you succeed in being amusing, while also avoiding seeming unsure of yourself. My complaints regarding your humour are, firstly, that you play the drunk homeless person angle a great deal throughout your article. While it is obviously a cornerstone of the article and necessary since these are the astronauts, I would suggest that you look for a couple more sources of humour or at least stop recycling the joke at times when it does not feel necessary. Also make sure you finish a joke when you start it. You say that 'Astronauts are also often subject to prejudice against them, usually by the jealous airplane pilots - although this is not always the case.' You then go on to describe why there are prejudices against them, but seem to have neglected to complete the reason why it 'is not always the case'. I personally was disappointed that this was left like this as your first paragraph had been ideal up to that point.

Concept:

10

A superb concept that you explore as thoroughly as could be asked for, the mission descriptions and the commitment to all the sections means that very little else could be asked of you. Your tone is spot on and rarely deviates throughout, if there is a criticism to be made here it is that you very occasionally and very briefly slip from the tone, but this is usually rectified swiftly so it does not become a problem.

Prose and formatting:

8

Now your prose are absolutely fine, from my first read through I can only identify a few errors in your grammar, please proofread yourself to get rid of a couple of small errors. My complaint here is that some of the later sections are too long. For the user-base of uncyclopedia a large block of text on a page is like being presented with a glass of cold sick, they don't want it... in most cases. The main candidate for editing n your article is the 'Disastrous 5' section which is very long compared to the other sections, do all the parts of this section need to stay? If you are particularly attached to this part of your article then try to remove a couple of words here and there, you may be surprised at how much you can cut out.

Images:

6

Your existing images are absolutely fine and their captions are intelligently written. However the reason for the low score is the near complete lack of images in the second half of the article. This part desperately needs some images as it looks painstakingly boring to read through otherwise. Pictures, while secondary to the content of your article, are essential to break up the long blocks of text otherwise you will have people completely overlooking the second half of your article.

Miscellaneous:

8

My overall grade of the article.

Final Score:

40

Your article is very solid and would be an easy 9 if not for the lack of images in the latter part. I, personally, found it very amusing to read and thought that your style was engaging and intelligent. All that I feel you need to do is include some more images and perhaps edit down some of the sections, if that is done appropriately, I think the page has the makings of a featured article. Good luck with any editing.